On 26/07/2017 19:45, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:
They certainly will if the reason they chose London as a head
office
was to give access to the EU.

no, it wasn't - only 15% of business of these banks is with the EU,
and when they came it was far less.

Right - so an increasing share of their business is to be thrown away?

It's not being "thrown away". It's being traded for a different set of
benefits

Care to say what those are? And hard facts rather than speculation. I'm
not really interested in only optimism.

What you would need to know is what percentage of their business comes
from being based in the UK, rather than the EU.

As the banks chose to base themselves in the UK, all of it

When the UK was part of the EU, it may well have made sense for an
international bank etc to base in the UK. But if it does less business in
the UK than EU, it would also make sense to move there. As appears to be
happening with some.



Those that weren't already here came because of deregulation. Nothing to
do with being in the EU.
Also Euro are transacted in New York and Singapore which in case you
hadn't noticed are not in the EU.

That is not the issue!